Debating נשׂיא in Ezekiel 40–48: Retrospective, Eschatological, or Present for the Future?
Numerous scholars have endeavored to identify a figure נשׂיא in Ezekiel’s temple vision, chapters 40–48. However, the consensus remains elusive due to three issues. First, Ezekiel’s use of the term נשׂיא seems inconsistent, particularly when compared with the term מלך. Second, defining the relationship between the future temple vision and the realistic נשׂיא figure is strenuous, leading to uncertainty about interpreting the realistic stipulations in the chapters. Third, the debate persists on whether the נשׂיא in Ezekiel 40–48 is identical to the Messianic נשׂיא in Ezekiel 34 and 37. While Messianic prophecies typically employ מלך to designate the Messianic figure, such features and roles do not align with the נשׂיא in Ezekiel 40–48.
Various proposed answers fall into four categories. First, some argue that the נשׂיא in the vision reflects a retrospective view toward the pre-monarchy period. They suggest that נשׂיא historically represented tribes before the monarchy, and Ezekiel’s negative perspective on previous kings leads him to use the term to harken back to a tribal confederacy period. However, this approach fails to explain the implication of a substantial נשׂיא within the future vision. Second group views the נשׂיא as an idealistic figure for a utopian theocratic society, representing a vision for the future society rather than a return to the past. According to this, the theocratic state portrays an idealistic and conceptual world. They argue that נשׂיא symbolizes the ideal leadership under YHWH’s reign to embody utopian theocratic society. Nevertheless, this view struggles to explain why the cultic regulations are depicted as realistic rather than conceptual. Third category insists that the נשׂיא is secular or lay leadership for the future restored community, situated the period between the post-exile and the eschatological end. They point out that the duties given to the נשׂיא are practical and there is no connection with the eschatological Davidic נשׂיא in chapters 34–37. The interpretation, however, faces a problem in incorporating the practical legislations with the visionary nature of the temple. Lastly, some scholars identify נשׂיא as the messianic figure, interpreting the temple in the vision as the worship center after the second coming of Christ. Nevertheless, the sacrificial system in the vision clashes the messianic interpretation with ongoing bloody sacrificial system in the text.
This article aims to comprehensively investigate the history of interpretation and issues surrounding the meaning of נשׂיא in the vision chapters. This will be divided into three sections. First, this study investigates and categorizes the debate among Ezekiel scholarship with inherent problems. Next, it suggests the meaning of the returned temple as a hermeneutical key to interpret the meaning of נשׂיא. Last section examines how the returned temple fits the structure of the vision chapters.